传达环境在肥胖中所起作用的证据以及对政府应对肥胖政策的支持:一项带有荟萃分析的系统综述。

IF 6.6 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Health Psychology Review Pub Date : 2022-03-01 Epub Date: 2020-10-02 DOI:10.1080/17437199.2020.1829980
James P Reynolds, Milica Vasiljevic, Mark Pilling, Theresa M Marteau
{"title":"传达环境在肥胖中所起作用的证据以及对政府应对肥胖政策的支持:一项带有荟萃分析的系统综述。","authors":"James P Reynolds,&nbsp;Milica Vasiljevic,&nbsp;Mark Pilling,&nbsp;Theresa M Marteau","doi":"10.1080/17437199.2020.1829980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Public support for many policies that tackle obesity by changing environments is low. This may reflect commonly held causal beliefs about obesity, namely that it is due to failures of self-control rather than environmental influences. Several studies have sought to increase public support by changing these and similar causal beliefs, with mixed results. The current review is the first systematic synthesis of these studies. Searches of PsycInfo, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Open Grey yielded 20 eligible studies (<i>N</i> = 8977) from 11,776 abstracts. Eligible studies were controlled experiments with an intervention group that communicated information about the environment's role in obesity, and a measure of support for environment-based obesity policies. The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO. Meta-analyses showed no evidence that communicating information about the environment's influence on obesity changed policy support or the belief that the environment influences obesity. A likely explanation for this null effect is the ineffectiveness of interventions that were designed to change the belief that the environment influences obesity. The possibility remains, however, that the association observed between beliefs about the causes of obesity and attitudes towards obesity policies is correlational and not causal.</p>","PeriodicalId":48034,"journal":{"name":"Health Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17437199.2020.1829980","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communicating evidence about the environment's role in obesity and support for government policies to tackle obesity: a systematic review with meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"James P Reynolds,&nbsp;Milica Vasiljevic,&nbsp;Mark Pilling,&nbsp;Theresa M Marteau\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17437199.2020.1829980\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Public support for many policies that tackle obesity by changing environments is low. This may reflect commonly held causal beliefs about obesity, namely that it is due to failures of self-control rather than environmental influences. Several studies have sought to increase public support by changing these and similar causal beliefs, with mixed results. The current review is the first systematic synthesis of these studies. Searches of PsycInfo, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Open Grey yielded 20 eligible studies (<i>N</i> = 8977) from 11,776 abstracts. Eligible studies were controlled experiments with an intervention group that communicated information about the environment's role in obesity, and a measure of support for environment-based obesity policies. The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO. Meta-analyses showed no evidence that communicating information about the environment's influence on obesity changed policy support or the belief that the environment influences obesity. A likely explanation for this null effect is the ineffectiveness of interventions that were designed to change the belief that the environment influences obesity. The possibility remains, however, that the association observed between beliefs about the causes of obesity and attitudes towards obesity policies is correlational and not causal.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48034,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Psychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17437199.2020.1829980\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2020.1829980\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/10/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2020.1829980","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/10/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

公众对许多通过改变环境来解决肥胖问题的政策的支持度很低。这可能反映了人们普遍持有的关于肥胖的因果观念,即肥胖是由于自我控制的失败,而不是环境的影响。一些研究试图通过改变这些和类似的因果信念来增加公众的支持,结果好坏参半。本综述是对这些研究的首次系统综合。在PsycInfo、Medline、Web of Science、Scopus和Open Grey中检索,从11776篇摘要中获得20篇符合条件的研究(N = 8977)。符合条件的研究是由一个干预组进行的对照实验,该干预组传达了有关环境在肥胖中的作用的信息,并衡量了对基于环境的肥胖政策的支持。该议定书有望在PROSPERO上登记。荟萃分析显示,没有证据表明环境对肥胖影响的信息传播会改变政策支持或环境影响肥胖的信念。对这种无效效应的一个可能解释是,旨在改变环境影响肥胖这一信念的干预措施无效。然而,仍然有可能观察到,对肥胖原因的信念和对肥胖政策的态度之间的联系是相关的,而不是因果关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Communicating evidence about the environment's role in obesity and support for government policies to tackle obesity: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Public support for many policies that tackle obesity by changing environments is low. This may reflect commonly held causal beliefs about obesity, namely that it is due to failures of self-control rather than environmental influences. Several studies have sought to increase public support by changing these and similar causal beliefs, with mixed results. The current review is the first systematic synthesis of these studies. Searches of PsycInfo, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Open Grey yielded 20 eligible studies (N = 8977) from 11,776 abstracts. Eligible studies were controlled experiments with an intervention group that communicated information about the environment's role in obesity, and a measure of support for environment-based obesity policies. The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO. Meta-analyses showed no evidence that communicating information about the environment's influence on obesity changed policy support or the belief that the environment influences obesity. A likely explanation for this null effect is the ineffectiveness of interventions that were designed to change the belief that the environment influences obesity. The possibility remains, however, that the association observed between beliefs about the causes of obesity and attitudes towards obesity policies is correlational and not causal.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Psychology Review
Health Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The publication of Health Psychology Review (HPR) marks a significant milestone in the field of health psychology, as it is the first review journal dedicated to this important and rapidly growing discipline. Edited by a highly respected team, HPR provides a critical platform for the review, development of theories, and conceptual advancements in health psychology. This prestigious international forum not only contributes to the progress of health psychology but also fosters its connection with the broader field of psychology and other related academic and professional domains. With its vital insights, HPR is a must-read for those involved in the study, teaching, and practice of health psychology, behavioral medicine, and related areas.
期刊最新文献
Analytical decisions pose moral questions. Components of multiple health behaviour change interventions for patients with chronic conditions: a systematic review and meta-regression of randomized trials. Identifying the psychosocial barriers and facilitators associated with the uptake of genetic services for hereditary cancer syndromes: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Protection motivation theory and health behaviour: conceptual review, discussion of limitations, and recommendations for best practice and future research. Inhibitory control training to reduce appetitive behaviour: a meta-analytic investigation of effectiveness, potential moderators, and underlying mechanisms of change.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1